A Cultural Critique of the Philippine Bureaucracy

by: Nessil Marie C. Ballesteros

       Modern society is an administered society (Lerner and Warat, 1992:1). Things should be well-organized and people must be efficient in whatever we do. This is what the classic Weberian bureaucracy has been saying. As it is defined, bureaucracy is an organization a pyramidal structure of authority (Peters, 1978:3). It utilizes the enforcement of universal and impersonal rules to maintain that structure of authority, and which emphasizes the non-discretionary aspects of bureaucracy. This knowledge has been used during the shift from patron-client to capitalism to prevent problems of mismanagements in a modern society. From the name itself, Weberian bureaucracy was established and developed by Max Weber.

Authority, in the Weberian form, is the means for balancing the dynamic tension and for keeping the ropes connected but not tangled (Lerner and Warat, 1992:44). There is no doubt on bureaucracy’s universality. We can find authority in different places. Division of labor is anywhere. People are aiming to be efficient at whatever we do. The concept of bureaucracy was imbibed by the people unconsciously. We were not aware that as we follow the rules and regulations, we are already captivated by bureaucracy. We are under bureaucracy because we think that it is universal. People around the world should have specialization to be efficient. But, where did bureaucracy come from? Well, bureaucracy is created by a man who came from a Western country-Max Weber, a German sociologist.

It is believed that complete bureaucratized administration is unshatterable and indispensable (Corpuz, 1993:70). However, it is imperfect as verified by the historical data because social and political changes used a radical form of bureaucracy. An example here is the Nazi movement in Germany, which overthrew the rule of law. Also, it is believed that bureaucracy is rational (Corpuz, 1993:70). But being rational and expertise in bureaucracy is an ideology, thus causing it to be ideological and not rational. In addition to this, bureaucracy is said to be value-neutral (Corpuz, 1993:70). But, it could not be completely value-neutral because it is human-made and each of us embraces values that affect our thinking. Bureaucracy has been used to justify the authority of the Western people. Through this, they were able to make people believe that authority is important for a society to be administered well. And who is the authority? Of course, the Western people.

The Philippines is one of the countries who is trying to bureaucratize its administration. And we are looking at the classic Weberian Bureaucracy as our model. If we will look at the characteristics of bureaucracy, we will see that the core of bureaucracy is specialization, an elaborate and refined division of labor (Lerner and Warat, 1992:43). In the Philippine administration, we can see division of labor as different offices and departments were opened to cater the different needs of the Filipinos. For example is the Department of Labor and Employment who helps people to seek for job both local and abroad. Also, impersonality is a characteristic of classic Weberian bureaucracy (Lerner and Warat, 1992:49). This refers to the style of interpersonal interaction and the attitudes towards claimant of the bureaucracy. For people to be efficient and to be objective, we need to be impersonal and to just focus on how to finish our job effectively and efficiently. Then, there’s also the selection on who will sit in the authority based on merit system (Peters, 1978:75). Bureaucracy is supposed to hire the best personnel as possible. These are just some of the cultural biases, which prove that bureaucracy is not value-neutral. Western people used this to justify the authority they have, so no one would hesitate to entangle it. And we, the Filipinos accepted it.

Because of this knowledge there are Filipino values that were marginalized. One is the pakikipagkapwa-tao. Because of the need for impersonality to achieve efficiency, this value is slowly deteriorating. In relation to this is being subjective. Because of the need to be efficient we were not able to have that personal relationship with our co-worker. Another value that is marginalized is the pagkukusa or taking the initiative. We are lacking this because of division of labor. We know what to do but we don’t do it because we are not specialized on that area. We tend to be inflexible. Furthermore, because of the merit system, neutral competent or ascription through caste, race, or class is not already applied on the administration.

This is bureaucracy. It was taught to us to be a beautiful concept that can help us be successful. But there’s more than that….


Corpuz, Onofre D. “Theoretical Limitations of Max Weber’s Systematic Analysis of
 Bureaucracy”, in Introduction to Public Administration in the Philippines: A Reader.
 Edited by Bautista, Victoria, et al. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.1993.

Lerner, A. W. and Warat, J. “Public Administration: A Realistic Reinterpretation of
Contemporary Public Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.1992.

Peters, Guy B. “The Politics of Bureaucracy: A Comparative Perspective. New York: Longman, Inc.1978.

A Cultural Critique of Filipino Politicians' Endorsements

by: Erica Roxanne A. Tabanda

       Every now and then we see these commercials and advertisements with politicians promoting, not their political career, but certain products. Nothing’s wrong with people doing commercials. But politicians? I don’t think so. With all these advertisements coming up and about, I think these politicians have a hidden agenda behind these commercials. And I don’t think I’m the only one who notices this. Are these politicians really promoting their respective products just for the sake of promoting it? Or are they really promoting themselves, as someone to vote for, in the elections to come?            This isn’t the only one I find bothersome. From time to time, commercials pop up wherein politicians brag about their proposed projects along with their accomplishments. They promise people, in this case the Filipinos, a brighter future and leave us with slogans that would make us remember them in the coming elections. But is this true? Do these commercials that they present to us really for us? Or are they doing this for their own sake? Or is this the so-called political advertising?

Just recently, on the 17th of June 2008, Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago turned over medical equipments worth over P12 million which came from her annual pork barrel funds or the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) to the Philippine General Hospital (PGH). During the ceremony, the said senator commented on the politicians using commercials as a front for political advertisements. Basically, she stated that these so-called “presumptive candidates” are going against the law, the election laws to be exact, by doing a premature campaign. They appear on televisions, billboards and other media endorsing these products and advocacy projects. As Sen. Santiago said (Jumilla, 2008), “Biro mo itong mga taong ito sila ang gumagawa ng batas na walang premature campaign tapos sila rin ang unang lumalabag ng batas. Kaya kung ako sa inyo kailanman ay di ko iboboto itong product endorsers na ito na wala nang inisip kundi pagmumukha nila.”With this, she urged the audience consisting of medical workers and patients not to vote for these candidates who, as she says, are engaging in an activity which is illegal. She even goes so far as to saying that they just want to be commercial models but are ugly.

She really didn’t name the people she was referring to (Rosales, 2008). But it was clear that she was talking about Senators Panfilo Lacson as an image model of a skin care center, Loren Legarda in the skin whitening and environment protection advertisements, Francis Escudero who is promoting a food supplement, Manuel Roxas II and Pia Cayetano in the detergent commercial, Richard Gordon in a bath soap commercial, Manuel Villar Jr who advocates the welfare of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) and Vice President Noli de Castro who promotes PAG-IBIG. All of which are aspiring to be elected government officials in the 2010 elections.

Senator Panfilo Lacson, however, countered Sen. Miriam Santiago’s statements by saying that (Jumilla, 2008), “I hope and pray that some crazy companies will risk losing money on certain products and get her as endorser so she would stop sourgraping on our ads”. What he implied was that he, along with other candidates for the 2010, is not endorsing themselves but their companies and their companies’ product. He also believes that Sen. Santiago is just bitter because there aren’t any companies asking her to promote their products. Even Senator Francis Escudero, who appeared in a health supplement commercial with his wife, countered Sen. Santiago’s arguments. He brought up the concept of jurisprudence which does not prohibit him, or other elected officials like him, from endorsing such products (Ibid.). His decision to endorse such a product has nothing to do with politics or the upcoming elections. The only reason why he agreed to the project was that they, the couple, have been taking the supplement for about a year now and that they had twins so the extra income they would receive could help to support them (Buan-Deveza, 2008).

I think Sen. Lacson’s comeback isn’t as strong as Sen. Santiago’s statements. Compared to her statement, Sen. Lacson had a lame excuse for having to with political advertising. He stands firmly behind his own words and stresses that any lawyer would say that “there’s nothing illegal in these endorsements” (Cabacungan, 2008). I mean, it is clear to most of the Filipinos, including myself, that they want to show up as much as possible to let the Filipinos recognize them and vote them in the 2010 elections.

From this argument, Sen. Santiago came up with a 19-paged petition on four days after the PGH ceremony. She forcefully declared to the Commission on Elections (Comelec) that these advertisements presented by the candidates for the 2010 elections through the different forms of media are illegal offenses. Further, she said that any form of political advertising not included in the official campaign period is illegal. Also, within this petition of hers, she wanted the Comelec to issue a restraining order against the politicians who are allegedly engaging in these political advertisements (Santiago, June 23, 2008). Therefore, she is implying that it is unfair to the other candidates because these people are campaigning two years before the official campaign period. It violates the equal protection clause of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. In her petition, she indicates that if she does not obtain a categorical ruling form the Comelec, she will appeal her petition before the Supreme Court (SC) (Ibid.).

This is the issue I chose because it’s very recent and it really concerns us Filipinos and our future. It is a political issue that faces us all. It is the phenomenon of commercial advertisements and endorsements of politicians (Rufo, 2008). It is an issue of campaigning before the official campaigning period by the public officials.

Universally, politicians are the ones who should stay neutral and objective on issues circulating around their respective countries. But here in the Philippines, why are our political candidates going through commercials and endorsements when they are supposed to be “neutral” because they are advertisements in themselves of the Filipino people? By endorsing such products, it would be unfair to other related products and substitutes because these political candidates favor one brand over another when they are supposed to stay objective. Is this a new trend among Filipino politicians? Also, do they have to use commercials and these products to gather more airtime, and thus votes, for themselves on the upcoming election?

Personally, I don’t think politicians should be going about doing commercials because of three reasons. First is that on the side of producers, firms and companies, it would be unfair. They become marginalized because their product is faced with an endorser who is “respected” by the country. How can they compete with endorsers who sit in government administrations and are actively involved in the country’s politics? They are, of course, in the losing end here. Such activities are therefore not beneficial to other firms and companies because of the “unfair” competition.

Second, I agree with what Sen. Santiago stated in the PGH ceremony. I don’t think it’s appropriate for a politician to lend his image in this manner. I don’t think that these aspiring candidates are doing these commercials for the sake of the products alone. I think, like most other Filipinos, that they are already campaigning for themselves for the upcoming elections. It therefore, as stated by Sen. Santiago, violates the election laws and policies which makes this illegal. They are campaigning even before the official campaigning period. So with this, I think that what they are doing is more of a political advertising than endorsing the product. We, Filipinos aren’t ignorant. We could see behind their actions and commercials. They are indirectly promoting their candidacy and the familiarity of their faces with the public for the elections (Ibid.).

In line with this, it’s also unfair to other political candidates because they get less time in promoting their advocacies and stands. The relatively poorer candidates would also find this unfair because only the rich could provide for themselves a commercial.

Third, I agree with former Senate president Jovito Salonga when he says that these acts are unethical. Why? It’s because public officials such as themselves are supposed to be professional. As stated in Section 4b of Republic Act No. 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (Ibid.), “Public officials and employees shall perform and discharge with the highest degree of excellence, professionalism, intelligence and skill. They shall enter public service with utmost devotion and dedication to duty. They shall endeavor to discourage wrong perception of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue patronage.”

Therefore, with this, I believe that these endorsements by our politicians should not be allowed and be deemed illegal for it goes against laws, especially those on election policies.

Buan-Deveza, R. (2008, April 17). Senator finds out showbiz is about hard work, not just ‘pa-cute’. ABS-CBN News.

Cabacungan, G.C. Jr. (2008, June 17). Santiago: Senator-endorsers ‘ugly’, ‘unfit’ for office. Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Jumilla, L. (2008, June 17). Santiago: Don’t vote for politicians with commercials. ABS-CBN News.

Rosales, A. (2008, June 18). Miriam slams colleagues engaged. The Daily Tribune.

Rufo, A. (2008, June 21). Commercial ads of politicians partisan activity but not premature campaigning. ABS-CBN News.

Santiago, M.S. (2008, June 18). Miriam donates pork barrel for PGH equipments. Senadora Miriam’s Blog. Retrieved June 26, 2008, from http://www.miriam.com.ph/

Santiago, M.S. (2008, June 23). Miriam seeks Comelec Rule on Poll Ads. Senadora Miriam’s Blog. Retrieved June 26, 2008, from http://www.miriam.com.ph/ 2008/06/miriam-seeks-comelec-rule-on-poll-ads.html

A Cultural Critique on Philippine Oligarchy

ni: Floper Gershwin E. Manuel

        Kapag pinag-uusapan ang tungkol sa pulitika ng Pilipinas, kadalasan sinasabi ng mga tao na wala na itong silbi dahil hindi naman daw para sa kanila ang pulitika. Nagkaroon na kasi ng paniniwala ang masang Pilipino na ang pulitika ay para lamang sa iilang pamilya. Tanggap na ng mga Pilipino na ang kapangyarihan at karapatan sa pagpapatakbo ng gobyerno ay hindi para sa lahat. Kaakibat na rin ng paniniwalang ito, ang paniniwala sa kaisipan na ang pwede lang tumakbo o pumasok sa pulitika ay mga mayayaman at mas maganda pa kung galling siya sa pamilya ng dati nang mga naghahari sa pulitika.

Kung tutuusin, tama nga naman ang kaisipang ito kapag ating tiningnan sa pangkalahatan. Bawat lugar na yata sa Pilipinas ay hawak ng iilang pamilya lamang. Halimbawa ng mga ito ay ang mga Osmeña sa Cebu, Lopez sa Iloilo, Cojuango sa Tarlac, Roxas sa Capiz, Ejercito sa San Juan, Romualdez sa Leyte, Aquino sa Tarlac, Marcos sa Ilocos, at mga Escudero sa Sorsogon. (McCoy; _____)

Kahit sa mga maliliit na bayan ay may iilang pamilya lang din ang naghahari. Halimbawa nalang ay ang baying kinalakihan ko sa Ilocos Norte, na kung saan ay pamilyang “naghahari” ay ang pamilya ng mga Abadilla. Sa kasalukuyan nga, ang anak ang siyang alkalde at ang ama naman ang pangalawang alkalde. May lumalaban man sa mga ito tuwing eleksiyon, ay mga kaanak lang din ni na mga Abadilla din. Dahil sa ganitong sitwasyon at larawan ng pulitika sa amin ay naging pangkaraniwan na at naging katanggap-tanggap na para sa aking mga kababayan na ang pamilyang ito lamang ang may karapatan sa mga pinakamataas na posisyon sa aming bayan.

Paano nga ba umiikot ang ganitong pulitikal na paniniwala ng mga Pilipino? Si Dante Simbulan (2005) ay gumawa ng isang larawan na nagpapakita ng pag-ikot ng pulitika sa ating bansa at kung paano ito umiikot sa iilang tao lamang. (Larawan 1) Kung titingnan ang ginawa ni Simbulan, ito ay tama sa halos lahat ng bayan at lalawigan sa buong kapuluan. Ang mga nakapagtapos sa pag-aaral, propesyonal, may sariling kumpanya at mga galling sa dominanteng pamilya ng mga pulitiko lamang ang pwedeng tumakbo para sa isang posisyon tuwing halalan.

Ang pagtanggap sa ganitong kaisipan ay nagdadala ng iba’t-ibang mga pagpapahalaga na sa tingin ko ay masasabing naimulat na rin sa mga Pilipino ng mga dayuhang sumakop sa ating bansa. Ang ganitong kaalaman sa pulitika para sa akiun ay nagpapakahulugan sa pagkakaroon ng “objective” na pag-iisip. Iniisip ng mga masa na mas lamang ang isang kandito dahil lamang sa mayaman ito at galing sa pamilya ng dati ng mga naghahari sa lugar na iyon. “Iboboto ko siya dahil siya naman talaga ang mananalo kasi sila lang naman talaga ang humahawak sa pulitika ditto sa ating lugar”. Ito na ang katagang karaniwan nang sinasabi ng mga tao tuwing nalalapit na ang halalan. Ang pagboto o pagpili sa isang kandito tuwing halalan ay nababatay nalang sa kung sino o kung papaano nauugnay ang pulitikong ito sa mga dati nang naghaharing pamilya sa kanilang lugar. Para sa akin, ang ganitong kaisipan ay mula pa nang tayo’y sakupin ng mga dayuhan. Tingin ko ay ganito rin ang kaisipang namayani sa mga Pilipino bago sila mamulat sa karahasang ginagawa ng mga dayuhan. Nasabi ko ito dahil nagawa nating magpaka-alila sa mga dayuhan sa loob ng ilang daang taon. Tinanggap nila ang mga dayuhan sa kadahilanang iniisip nila na sila ang mas nakakaalam para mapabuti pa ang kanilang pamumuhay. Sa ngayon, ganito din ang nakikitang pagtrato ng mga Pilipino sa ating mga pulitko. Binoboto natin ang mga may malapit na kaugnayan sa mga naghaharing pamilya dahil iniisip natin na mas nakakaalam sila sa pagpapatakbo ng gobyerno at pati na rin ating buhay.

Ang isa pang pagpapahalaga na ipinapamalas natin sa pagtanggap sa ganitong kaalamang pulitikal ay ang pagpapahalaga sa “pagpapaubaya”. Sinabi kong pagbabaubaya dahil mukhan hinahayaan nalang natin ang ganitong sistemang pulitikal sa ating bansa. Wala nang naglalakas ng loob na sumalungat sa ganitong uri ng pag-iisip. Dahil ditto, parang ipinapaubaya na rin natin ang karapatan para makakita ng pagpapabago sa sistema ng ating pulitika. Nasanay na natin an gating sarili na sumunod nalang sa “uso” at naniwala na tayo na wala na rin naming magbabago.

Idagdag pa ditto ang pagpapahalaga sa “kapangyarihan at kontrol”. Kapangyarihan at kontrol para sa iilang tao lamang at hindi para sa lahat. Kasabay ng pagtanggap natin sa kaalamang ito, pinaubaya na natin ang pagpapatakbo sa gobyerno at hinayaan na rin natin na sila nalang ang magkaroon ng kapangyarihan at kakayanan para patakbuhan ang gobyerno sa paraan na gusto nila. Ang paraan na ito ay naipagpapatuloy kahit na magbago man ang nasa posisyon na ito, dahil hindi naman nagbabago ang pamilyang nagpapatakbo dito. Ang lahat ng mga pagpapahalang ito ay walang kamalay-malay na natanggap na ng bawat Pilipino.

Ngunit totoo nga ba na ang kaalamang pulitikal na ito ay nakikita sa lahat ng lugar sa ating bansa sa lahat ng panahon?

--Gov. Grace Padaca; Isabela

Ang kaso ni Gobernador Ma. Gracia Cielo Padaca sa Isabela ay nagpapakita na ang kaalamang pulitikal na tanggap na ng mga Pilipino ay hindi makikita sa lahat ng lugar sa lahat ng pagkakataon. Si Grace Padaca ay nilarawan ang kanyang sarili bilang isang mahirap at may kapansanang babae na naglakas-loob na labanan ang pamilyang naghahari sa ISabela sa loob ng ilang dekada. […I, a poor, physically handicapped woman…”] (COA News). Si Padaca ay isang polio victim na nangahas pumasok sa mundo ng pulitika at siyang nagbigay ng pagbabago sa takbo ng pulitika sa lalawigan ng Isabela.

Ang Isabela ay kilala dahil sa naghaharing pamilya ng mga Dy sa loob ng halos apat na dekada na. Si PAdaca ay tumakbong gobernador noong 2004 laban sa isang bihasa na sa pulitika na si Faustino Dy Sr. Si Faustino Dy Jr. ay nagging Congressman na sa Isabela sa loob ng tatlong termino. Ito ay tinalo ni Grace Padaca ng 44, 292 na boto mula sa tatlumpo’t anim na bayan ng Isabela. (ibid) Ayon sa Padaca, hindi naman daw ganun kadali ang manalo sa pulitika lalo na kung ang kalaban mo ay ang pamilyang tinanggap na ng mga taga-Isabela na maghari sa kanilang lugar. Ngayon, ang Isabela ay nalihis na sa dating tawag na “Bansa ng mga Dy”.

--Sabas “Abang” Mabulo; Camarines Sur

Hindi lamang si Grace Padaca ang may kwento sa pagbibigay ng ibang tanawin sa mundo ng pulitika sa Pilipinas. Si Sabas Mabulo  ay kagaya rin ni Padaca na lumaban kahit alam na ang makakalaban ay ang isa sa naghaharing pamilya sa ating bansa. Si Mabulo ay tumakbong Congressman ng unang distrito ng Camarines Sur noong 2007 laban sa pinakabatang anak ng Pangulo ng Pilipinas na si Diosdado Arroyo o mas kilala sa tawag na “Dato”. (Pabico, 2007) Ang tanging pinanghawakan lang ni Abang sa kanyang pagtakbo ay ang kanyang pagiging Bikolano na kung saan sinabi niya na ang mga Bikolano lamang ang nakakaintindi sa kapwa Bikolano. Si Dato ay hindi talaga Bikolano dahil lumipat lang siya sa lugar na iyon para maging residente ng lugar na iyon.

--Felipe Marquez; Batangas

Ang kwento naman ni Felipe Marquez ang nagpapatunay na hindi lamang mga propesyonal at nakapagtapos sa pag-aaral ang may kakayanang pumasok sa pulitika. Si Felipe Marquez ay 75 na taong gulang nang tumakbo sa pagka-alkalde sa bayan ng Rosario sa lalawigan ng Batangas. Si Marquez ay natapos lamng ang ikaapat na baiting sa elementarya.

Ang mga kwento ng mga pulitkong ito ang nagpapatunay na ang tinanggap nang kaalaman ng mga Pilipino ay hindi talaga totoo sa lahat ng pagkakataon. Ipinakita ng mga pulitikong ito ang tunay na kaalaman sa ideya ng “demokrasya” sa ating bansa. Ipinakita nila ang karapatan ng mga tao para malayang mamili ng mga gusto nilang magpatakbo ng gobyerno sa ating bansa.

Kaakibat ng naitagong kaalaman na ito ay mga pagpapahalagang tulad ng malawakang pag-intindi o “subjectivism. Ipinakita nito na ang mga Pilipino ay dapat mamili ng kanilang iboboto na may iba’t-ibang batayan. Dapat hindi lamang nila iboto ang isang pulitiko dahil sa wala na silang pagpipilian. Ang pagpapahalang ito ay nagsasabi na dapat tingnan muna ang kakayanan ng isang tao para bigyan ng magandang takbo ang sistema ng pulitika.

Ipinapakita din dito ang pagpapahalaga sa “nagkakaisang pag-iisip” o mas kilala siguro sa tawag na “verstehen”. Ang kaalaman sa tunay na demokrasya ay naglalayon talaga na maipahatid ang kahalagahan ng pag-intindi at pagrespeto sa kaisipan ng mas nakararami. Ibig sabihin nito, binibigyan ang mga tao ng mga pagpipilian at hinahayaan silang mamili ng naayon sa kanilang kaisipan. Hindi sila mapipilitan na ihalal kung sino man ang mas kilala na may higit na kapangyarihan.

Ang “lakas-ng-loob” din ay isang pagpapahalaga na naitago ng kaalamang hindi tinanggap ng mga Pilipino. Ang mga Pilipino ay nakilala sa kanilang tapang na ipagtanggol ang kanilang sarili laban sa karahasan ng mga mananakop nila. Nakilala sila sa kanilang tapang na mag-aklas at lumaba para lang makamit ang minimithi nilang pagbabago. Ang pagpapahalagang ito ay naitago ng mga naghaharing pulitiko dahil mas ipinakita nila na bilang lang ang may hawak ng kapangyarihan at wala nang paraan para mabago pa ang kalagayang ito. Ngunit, ang “lakas-ng-loob” ay siyang ipinakita ng mga nabanggit na pulitiko sa itaas, kung saan nagkaroon sila ng tapang na kalabanin ang kung sino man ang “namamayani” para lang maipakita sa mga Pilipino na mayroon pang ibang tanain ang pulitika at pwede pang baguhin kung ano man pagtingin natin ditto sa ngayon.

Ang kaisipang pulitikal sa bansa ay isa lamang pagpapakita sa pagkakakulong ng utak ng mga Pilipino kung saan tinanggap na nila ang isang bagay at binalang bilang isang katotohanan para lang sila mismo ay makontrol din ng iilang taong nasa “makapangyarihan”. Ngunit para sa akin, ang pagbabago ay nariyan lamang.


·         _______. (2004). Grace Padaca, former COA auditor, is the governor-elect of Isabela. Available at http://www.coa.gov.ph/COA_News/2004/v5n2/news_v5n2.asp. Accessed last June 21, 2008

·         McCoy, Alfred. (___). An Anrchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines.

·         Pabico, Alecks P. (April 11, 2007). Isabela’s Non-dynasty detour. Available at http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1605. Accessed last June 21, 2008.

·         Pabico, Alecks P. (April 9, 2007). Defying Dynastic Rule in CAmarines Sur. Accessed at http://ww.pcij.org/blog/?p=1597. Accessed last June 21, 2008.

·         Pabico, Alecks P. (May 3, 2007). An old man revs up his town. Accessed at http://i-site.ph/blog/?cat=4. Accessed last June 21, 2008.

Simbulan, Dante C. (2005). The Modern Principalia: The Historical Evolution of the Philippine Ruling Oligarchy. UP Press. Quezon City.